Informed patient decision-making is the central goal of patient decision support intervention (DSI) and informed consent. How patients interpret and use information in reaching informed decisions is critical to improving these processes. We propose to examine information types commonly used to communicate risks and benefits of medical treatments to patients: statistical information, graphical lists, graphical drawings and diagrams, patient interviews. Prior work in these fields emphasizes the importance of education and ethnicity on comprehension and interpretation of health information. For that reason, this study will sample four groups of participants varied by African American/Caucasian ethnicity and college-educated and not college-educated education levels. Participants: 200 men age 55- 74, varied by ethnicity (African American/Caucasian) and education (college-educated/not college educated). Videotaped Stimulus Material: Previously developed and tested Shared Decision-making Program for treatment decisions about benign prostatic hyperplasia (SDP/BPH). The program (3 copies enclosed for reviewers) has been tested in previous studies for efficacy and comprehensibility and revised and improved in graphic design by several years of field-testing. African Americans figure as the narrator of the tape and among patients interviewed. The tape represents the best available decision support interventions, making it ideal stimulus material to investigate patients' interpretation of information the impact on decisions. Study Design: The study will employ a structured interview approach, with the videotape as stimulus. Interviews will be audiotape recorded and will be approximately two hours in length. Content analysis will be augmented by rating scales administered at intervals. The technique will use a variation of think-aloud protocols, stopping the tape periodically to ask questions and administer brief scales. Pre/post survey instruments will be administered by telephone. Research questions to be addressed are: 1) Do information types differentially affect participants' likelihood to choose a treatment? 2) Do information types differentially affect participants' interpretation of importance and salience of the information? 3) What new questions or concerns are raised for participants by full information?